SACW | July 9-10, 2008 / Bangladesh: Sexual Harassment / Taliban in Pakistan / India's Hindu Taliban

[Harsh Kapoor]

South Asia Citizens Wire | July 9-10 , 2008 | 
Dispatch No. 2537 - Year 10 running

[1]  Bangladesh: Of Roses and Sexual Harassment (Rahnuma Ahmed)
[2]  Pakistan:
   (i) Economic, political betrayal? (Saba Gul Khattak)
   (ii) A charade or a real operation? (Omar R. Quraishi)
[3] India: Immigrants from Bangladesh become 
fodder for the police after the Jaipur terror 
killings (EPW)
[4] India: Myths About Muslims (A G Noorani)
[5] India: Two-Nation Theory (Saadat Hasan Manto)
[6] India: Indore ravaged - The aftermath of BJP 
VHP sponsored Bandh (Vineet Tiwari)
[7] USA: Commission on Religious Freedom Urges 
Denial of U.S. Visa to Gujarat Chief Minister
[8] Announcements:
(i) Film Release: Inqilab, a documentary film on 
Shaheed Bhagat Singh (New Delhi,13 July 2008)
(ii) US Lecture tour Teesta Setalvad and R. B. 
Sreekumar (Baltimore, Miami, Minneapolis, 
Chicago, 10,11,12,13 July 2008)

______


[1]

New Age
7 July 2008

OF ROSES AND SEXUAL HARASSMENT

by Rahnuma Ahmed

`You should not have written about such sensitive 
issues in such indecorous language,' faculty 
members at Jahangirnagar University (JU) told me 
and my ex-colleague, Manosh Chowdhury. It was 
1997, four years before I left JU to become a 
writer.

We had written about the Provost of a Women's 
Hall of Residence. He would target first year 
women Anthropology students. They handed in a 
memorandum to the University authorities 
detailing his abuse of power: he was rude to 
their family members when they dropped in for 
visits, he ridiculed what they were taught, and 
the teachers who taught them (this included us). 
What was not mentioned in the memorandum however, 
was that he would often barge into their 
dormitories. Sometimes, also into the wash rooms. 
The Provost's misconduct later made it to the 
newspapers but what got left out was that he had 
dubbed three women students 'lesbians,' and 
another, 'a cigarette smoker.' We had included 
these in our article to map out the 
institutionalised nature of the Provost's power, 
to draw attention to the systemic character of 
sexual harassment on campuses. We had written, 
The issue is not whether these women are 
`lesbians'. Women have been scorned on other 
occassions because they have 'boyfriends'. Women 
returning to the halls in the evening are 
taunted, they are told they were `having fun in 
the bushes.' Institutional sexual harassment is 
not about hard facts alone, it takes place 
through language, through words that ridicule and 
scorn. (`Oshustho Pradhokkho na ki Pratishthanik 
Khomota,' Bhorer Kagoj, 9 July 1997).

We received no printed response, but hate mail 
instead. And a genteel comment on our 
`indecorous' use of language. Our next piece was 
entitled, 'What then does one call Sexual 
Harassment - A Rose?' (Bhorer Kagoj, 24 August 
1997).

The next year witnessed a student movement on 
Jahangirnagar campus, at forty plus days, the 
longest anti-rape campaign in South Asia. The 
University authorities gave in to student 
pressure, a Fact Finding Committee was formed. As 
events unfolded it became clear that a group of 
male students had been involved in successive 
incidents of rape which had taken place over 
several months, and that the University 
authorities had been reluctant to take action 
because of their political connections to the 
regime then in power, the Awami League. The 
movement was strong and unrelenting and gained 
tremendous popular support. Later, the university 
authorities meted out token punishment to those 
very students whom they had earlier protected, 
rather reluctantly.

A sit-in protest against rape in campus, brought 
out by the students union, in Jahangir Nagar 
University, in Dhaka, Bangladesh. August 24, 
1998. © Abir Abdullah/Drik/Majority World

One of the demands of the 1998 movement had been 
the formation of a Policy against Sexual 
Harassment. Dilara Chowdhury, Mirza Taslima 
Sultana, Sharmind Neelormi and I had worked long 
hours for weeks on end, to produce a working 
draft. I remember, our draft had said, sexual 
harassment is any unwelcome physical contact and 
advance, declaration of love accompanied by 
threat and intimidation if not reciprocated, 
sexually coloured remarks, display of 
pornography, any other unwelcome physical, verbal 
or non-verbal conduct of a sexual natureŠ
Policy Against Sexual Harassment: A Torturous Journey

Ten years later.

It's Friday night, well after ten, Anu Muhammod 
has just returned from Munshiganj, and I am 
fortunate to get hold of him. `So Anu, I hear 
that the Policy has not yet been ratified by the 
University Syndicate?' I ask the professor of 
economics at Jahangirnagar University, a 
well-known public intellectual and activist, and 
a good friend of many years. With a twinkle in 
his eyes and a deprecating smile, Anu launches 
into the story.

Naseem Akhter Hossain and I forwarded the Draft 
Policy to the university administration in 1999. 
Naseem, as you well know was the Provost of a 
women's hall, and one of the most dedicated 
members of the Fact Finding Committee. The 
university administration was absolutely 
terrified of the anti-rape movement. For them it 
was finally over, some of the students had been 
punished, they wanted to forget the matter. The 
next year, 17 of us forwarded it to JU 
administration, with a signed letter. And in 
those days, the 8th of March Committee was alive, 
teachers and students would sit and discuss 
women's issues and male power, we would hold a 
rally on International Women's Day, left groups, 
cultural groups would join in. It was an annual 
ritual, each year we would send the draft to the 
University administration requesting that they 
take steps to ratify it, to enforce it, each year 
they would tell us that it had been misplaced. 
This went on for several years.

Two years later the BNP led alliance came to 
power, and the elected Vice-Chancellor was 
removed from his position. Jahangirnagar 
University Teachers Association (JUTA) protested 
against the government action. Anyway, to cut a 
long story short, JUTA initiated a movement in 
protest against the government's high-handedness, 
a common platform was formed, I was present at 
one of the Teachers Association meetings and took 
the opportunity to place the Draft policy. 
Everyone was charged, and the Draft was approved, 
so you now had JUTA forwarding it to the 
University administration for ratification. I 
inquired again the next year but by then we were 
back to the old ritual, it had been misplaced. 
But soon, there was another incident of sexual 
harassment, a BBA teacher, the accusations were 
proven to be true, he lost his job. We raised the 
Policy issue again, each movement helped to 
revive it. I spoke to Professor Mustahidur 
Rahman, who was then the Vice-Chancellor.

`Yes Anu, what did he say?' I am very curious 
about the reasons forwarded on behalf of 
institutions, by people in positions of power, 
the language in which they resist measures aimed 
at ensuring justice. 'What did Mustahid bhai say?'

Anu's smile deepened. 'He said, yes, of course, 
we must look into it. But we have so much on our 
hands. I spoke to other teachers as well, why do 
we need a special Policy, they said. The country 
has criminal laws, University rules stipulate 
that teachers must not violate moral norms, we 
also have a Proctorial policy. So why do we need 
a separate Policy against Sexual Harassment? In 
2007, another movement began, against a teacher 
in Bangla department. He also lost his job later, 
and talk of the Policy was revived again. 
Actually, the women students went on a fast unto 
death programme, this was very serious, later 
Sultana Kamal, Rokeya Kabir, Khushi Kabeer, these 
women's movement leaders came and pleaded with 
the students to break their fast. They did, but 
on the condition that I would personally take up 
the matter with the University administration. 
They said, we trust you, we don't trust the 
administration.

After this, the University set up a Committee to 
review the Policy. I was on that Committee, so 
was Sultana Kamal. Legal points were added, the 
draft was brushed up, student organisations were 
invited to comment on it, also, the Teachers 
Association. But the teachers are not happy, many 
think that false allegations will be made, that 
it will be used by those who have influence, on 
grounds of personal enmity. I tell them that the 
Policy has clauses to prevent this from 
happening, any one who brings false allegations 
will be severely punished, no law of the land, 
against murder, kidnapping, theft, whatever has 
such built-in-clauses. Surely, that will be a 
deterrent? But it falls on deaf ears. The draft 
was sent to the Syndicate, it was not ratified. 
The members felt that it required more 
consideration.

And now, the latest incident, the one involving a 
teacher of the Dramatics department. I believe 
the Fact Finding Committee has submitted its 
report, there is yet again talk of instituting 
the Policy, but this time it's serious. There is 
new VC now, but this time I think they can no 
longer avoid it. There is strong support for the 
Policy.

This is how things stand at present. I think the 
Policy, once ratified, will create history. It 
will set a strong precedent for similar policies 
at other places of work. In garments factories, I 
often say, for women, it's not only a question of 
wages but being able to work in a safe and secure 
place, free of harassment and sexual advances.

`And what about other public universities,' I 
ask, knowing fully well the answer. No, says Anu, 
there is no talk of a Policy, let alone a 
finalised Draft.

Jahangirnagar has a strong tradition of protest 
and resistance, our conversation ends on this 
note. I forget who said it. Was it Anu? Or, was 
it me? Maybe, both of us?

Voices of Female Students

Four women students of Drama and Dramatics 
department have accused the departmental 
chairperson, M Sanowar Hossain (Ahmed Sani), of 
harassing them.

One of them confided to her classmates, Sir has 
asked me to go and see him. Well, why don't you? 
I am afraid. Why? Another woman said, he has 
asked me to go and see him too. You too? I don't 
want to. Why not?

They talked and discovered that they were not 
alone in their experiences of sexual harassment, 
that it was shared. One of them said, as is the 
practice in the department, I had bent to touch 
his feet to seek his blessings, as I rose up he 
pulled me and kissed me on my forehead. Another 
woman student, similarly abused but silent until 
the four junior women stepped forward, spoke of 
how he had grabbed her and kissed her cheek. 
Another woman said, I was so scared when he said 
I would have to go to his office, but I was angry 
too, I knew what was going to happen, I told a 
friend, I'll carry a brick in my bag. I want to 
mark him, so that people kow.

But the women also spoke of how they themselves 
felt marked. When I went back to the hostel and 
told the girls they wanted to know, what did he 
do to you? where did he touch you? how long did 
he hold you? I wept inside, she said. Why didn't 
anyone say, where's that bastard? Let's go and 
get him. Such responses make it so difficult to 
come out. Why should I take on this social 
pressure?

The girls also said, if it had just happened to 
me, if I hadn't discovered that there were other 
victims, I would never have spoken out. I don't 
think anyone would have believed me.

Male Academia and Its Insecurities

Why do University authorities resist the adoption 
of a policy that will help institute measures to 
redress wrongs? That will afford women protection 
against unwanted sexual advances, thereby 
creating an environment that is in synchrony with 
what it claims to be, an institution of greater 
learning and advancement.

I think what lies hidden beneath academic 
hyperbole is, although the university, as other 
public and private institutions, appears to be 
asexual, in reality, it is deeply embedded with 
sexual categories and preferences. Men are 
superior, both intellectually and morally, this 
is assumed to be the incontrovertible truth. For 
women, to be unmasking and challenging male 
practices, aided by a Complaint Cell, members of 
which will listen to their grievances, extend 
support, advocate sanctions if allegations are 
proven to be true, is a threat that terrifies the 
masculine academic regime of power and privileges.

But sexual harassment is not a bunch of roses. It 
is serious, it needs to be taken seriously.

_____


[2]


Dawn
July 9, 2008

ECONOMIC, POLITICAL BETRAYAL?

by Saba Gul Khattak

THERE is a fundamental disconnect between the 
wishes of the voters and policies that their 
elected representatives have ushered in 
post-February 2008.

The elections constituted an anti-Musharraf vote 
and a vote for peace. The clear message was that 
people were tired of the policies of the military 
regime in civilian garb. For many people, the 
issue of the rule of law was critical hence they 
voted for the restoration of the judiciary.

For a majority of Pakistanis, the frequency of 
suicide bombings and intensity of direct violence 
was terrifying. Over 70 such bombings happened 
over the course of nine to ten months between 
July 2007 and March 2008. This combined with 
other forms of violence - military operations in 
Balochistan and Fata, police brutality, targeted 
killings, kidnappings and disappearances - made 
people vote for peace. The election results were 
seen to be mass rejection of militancy and 
radicalisation. It was a vote against the status 
quo.

Yet, four months down the line, the status quo 
continues. The secular political parties that 
espoused democratic values have made dubious 
deals that betray their election promises, their 
ideals and are sorely discouraging for their 
party workers. Thus, many assert that the present 
PPP is not the PPP of the Bhuttos and that the 
present ANP is not the ANP of Bacha Khan. The PPP 
workers are disappointed that Gen Musharraf 
continues in power and the PPP continues to work 
with the same economic team that is responsible 
for the mess that the country is presently in. 
The PPP leadership has even appointed Hina 
Rabbani Khar to her old position to signal 
continuity of economic policies.

Prime Minister Gilani has also reassured foreign 
lenders that the policy of privatisation and 
liberalisation will persist. This implies that 
the poor will suffer more. Sadly the PPP draws 
its electoral strength from some of the poorest 
districts of Pakistan. The urgency to implement 
social protection lies in the four to five 
suicides daily due to rising prices. This urgency 
is lost on the economic team as the newly 
proposed safety nets for the poor are far from 
being implemented.

For example, the Benazir Card, announced amidst 
fanfare and made part of the budget, is yet to be 
institutionalised through Nadra and even when it 
is, it will cover only seven million of the 40 
million people living below the poverty line. We 
know that the poorest and most vulnerable do not 
have computerised NICs - thus the manner in which 
the poor are to be targeted is fundamentally 
flawed. The same apathy is repeated with minimum 
wage for labour announced two months ago. No 
concrete steps are in sight for implementation.

On the political front, the election results gave 
mixed signals. The implications of different 
political parties doing well in particular 
provinces caused concern. Yet the formation of a 
coalition government at the centre indicated that 
a strong federation where the federating units 
could work harmoniously, upholding provincial 
autonomy, was a new reality.

The subsequent cracks between the PPP and PML-N 
pertaining to the restoration of the judiciary 
have been disappointing. Even more disappointing 
for many PPP and ANP party workers in Sindh, 
especially in Karachi, is the deal with the MQM, 
which enjoys the support of the president. In May 
2007, the MQM resorted to violence and killings 
in Karachi at the behest of the establishment. 
How could the PPP and ANP forget those whose 
lives were sacrificed while defending principles 
and justice in the face of armed intimidation?

But, the great betrayal is the manner in which 
the ANP has signed peace deals with militants in 
Swat. This has repercussions for the entire 
country as the same style can be repeated 
elsewhere. The provincial coalition government 
has released the militants without confiscating 
their arms. Thus, the militants are back in Swat, 
terrorising the local population. The ANP 
supporters in Swat, many of whom have lost near 
and dear ones in the recent confrontations and 
suicide bombings feel alienated. They question 
the right of the provincial government to grant 
amnesty to murderers on their behalf.

Forgiving crimes against citizens implies a 
breakdown of the social contract and 
constitutional rights. The duty of the state is 
to provide justice, not let criminals loose on 
the very people whose fundamental right to life 
and livelihood the criminals have violated.

What can be the possible reason for the lag 
between the ANP and PPP election promises, vision 
and subsequent actions? Both were firmly against 
military dictators but are happy to work with one 
whom they call a 'relic of the past.' The ANP got 
a vote to end militancy in the province, not to 
let militants terrorise those who bravely refused 
to allow them to operate in places like Kalam. 
With popular support behind them in Swat, why has 
the ANP bargained from a position of weakness 
rather than strength?

Afrasiab Khattak was opposed to policies that he 
said were crafted by the ISI and the military in 
Islamabad. He was a staunch supporter of 
decision-making through parliament. Yet, the 
terms of the peace deals were neither debated in 
the provincial assembly nor within the ANP itself.

How is such a disconnect possible? The answer 
lies in Pakistan's complex political realities 
and flawed democracy. The involvement of 
intelligence agencies and international powers in 
the political twists and turns of Pakistani 
politics is all too well-known. What has become 
more obvious with time is the extent to which the 
people of Pakistan continue to be betrayed both 
economically and politically by those they repose 
their trust in. If the ANP and PPP were more 
accountable to the people of Pakistan than their 
foreign and domestic masters, they would enjoy 
increased popularity and it would be difficult to 
destabilise them.

They must realise that their strength lies in the 
poor people of this country who long for peace 
and prosperity. If they play the dangerous proxy 
games of other actors and feel 'powerful' by 
brokering dubious deals, they will continue to 
suffer paralysis from the lack of vision and 
direction that they are presently exhibiting.

The writer is a researcher in political science.

o o o

The News,
July 6, 2008

A CHARADE OR A REAL OPERATION?

by Omar R. Quraishi

Earlier this week, this newspaper carried an 
explosive article by Mohammad Malick on the 
operation to root out militancy in Khyber Agency. 
Titled quite courageously 'The Bara Operation is 
a lie, plain and simple', the article quoted from 
the writer's own account of having travelled 
through part of Khyber Agency and coming with the 
conclusion that the operation was more or less an 
eye-wash -- apparently to appease the Americans 
and to make Pakistanis think that the government 
and the military were finally getting tough on 
rooting out militancy. However, the writer also 
quoted an officer posted with the paramilitary 
Mehsud scouts, with whom he had had a 
conversation at a check-post on the Tirah-Jamrud 
road, who told him, anonymously of course, that 
the security for the commandant of the force was 
usually provided by "Haji Namdar's men", the very 
militants that the government was attempting to 
remove from Khyber Agency.

Going beyond these observations, several 
questions come to mind, and they relate to events 
both prior to and after the launch of the 
operation. For instance, on Jun 30 a 'mysterious 
explosion' blew up in a safe house used by Haji 
Namdar and his men in which at least seven people 
were killed, mostly militants. However, quite 
strangely, the authorities kept on insisting that 
the house was not targeted by them and that the 
explosion occurred because of explosives stored 
in it. But a spokesman for the Tehrik-e-Taliban 
claimed that the house had been attacked by a US 
drone. The question obviously is that if 
explosives were indeed stored in the house, as 
the government said they were, shouldn't the 
house have been a target for the operation in any 
case? Why the need to be so defensive about what 
happened -- as if the government or some elements 
in it did not want to anger Haji Namdar and his 
men.

Also, many reports prior to this operation 
suggested that Mangal Bagh, though also wanting 
to impose a literal and orthodox version of Islam 
on the local population, was not overtly 
anti-government and had publicly said that he did 
not support suicide bombings. Of course, this 
does not mean that the government should not have 
gone after him because his men were reportedly 
threatening shops in Peshawar. But even when the 
government did claim to go after such elements, 
all it did was blow up some houses -- Mangal 
Bagh's was dynamited -- but neither he nor any of 
his senior commanders, or even foot soldiers for 
that matter were anywhere close to these 
structures. Of course, how can you possibly 
expect the target of your operation to be in his 
home when you announce several days in advance 
that you will launch an operation against him -- 
this is precisely what the government did when 
several of its senior functionaries kept saying 
for days that an operation in Khyber Agency was 
about to happen. No wonder that by the time 
Mangal Bagh's house was blown up, he was said to 
be far away in Tirah Valley. Other than that a 
few isolated structures were also demolished and 
there was no resistance -- but how could there 
be, some sceptics were asking, if the militants 
had been alerted because of announcement made in 
considerable advance by the government about the 
timing of the operation.

As for other operational issues, the government 
had said that the army chief would be the overall 
incharge of the operation but as of July 1 no 
army units were seen to be participating in the 
offensive -- other than pictures of army tanks 
positioned outside Hayatabad -- and the operation 
was being conducted by the paramilitary Frontier 
Corps (FC). As for the FC, its chief, a 
major-general, told a press conference on the day 
that the operation began that it would last 
around 'five to six' days -- again details that 
did not necessarily need to be given to the media.

In any case, the operation has not moved (at 
least by the time this was being written) beyond 
Khyber Agency and into areas where the threat 
from militants is greatest. In fact, some foreign 
news agency reports on July 1 quoted the ISPR 
spokesman as saying that the operation would not 
be extended to the Waziristan region because the 
government was hopeful of a peace agreement 
there. This, however, clearly begs the point that 
what does such a peace agreement give the country 
other than allow such terrorist elements to 
regroup and strengthen themselves. They then use 
this time to launch attacks across the border and 
if their power is challenged, they threaten to -- 
and in fact do -- carry out devastating attacks 
inside Pakistan. They force their narrow version 
of Islam of the whole population under their 
influence and they do this upon pain of death. 
Countless girls schools and offices of NGOs have 
been attacked and bombed, as have hundreds if not 
dozens of video and music shop
s and barber shops, and in the process many an 
innocent life has been taken. They kidnap and 
kill whoever they want -- usually dubbing them 
'spies of America/Afghanistan' and their 
barbarism seems to know no bounds.

So unless the operation targets the real problem 
in Waziristan, Bajaur and increasingly Mohmand 
and Kurram agencies, it is not going to be of 
much use in tackling increasing Talibanisation. 
The point being made by a growing chorus of 
sceptics that this 'noora kushti' was more to 
placate a visiting senior US official and to 
ready the environment, so to speak, for the prime 
minister's visit to America at the end of this 
month, is now beginning to sound credible at the 
very least and not yet another conspiracy theory. 
Surely, those managing the operation would have 
heard Abraham Lincoln's famous line that 'you can 
fool some of the people all of the time, and all 
of the people some of the time, but you cannot 
fool all of the people all of the time.'

Postscript: By the way, in response to last 
week's column, 'Appeasing the militants', a 
reader emailed to clarify that the XI corps has 
two divisions -- one based in Peshawar and the 
other in Kohat. There has never been, as written 
in the article, an armoured brigade at Nowshera.


The writer is Editorial Pages Editor of The News.


______


[3]

Economic and Political Weekly
June 21, 2008

IN THE NAME OF JUSTICE
Immigrants from Bangladesh become fodder for the 
police after the Jaipur terror killings.

The bomb blasts in Jaipur on May 13 are still 
under investigation, yet in the minds of the 
police the perpetrators are already known - from 
among the Bangladeshi immigrants in the city. 
Immediately after the blasts, the state 
government officials and particularly the union 
minister of state for home, Jaiprakash Jaiswal, 
came out in front of the media and made some 
assertive comments on the purported culprits of 
the blasts and pointed the needle of suspicion to 
neighbouring  countries, without any concrete 
proof. With claims of possessing evidence linking 
the blasts to the terrorist outfit 
Harkat-ul-Jihad-Islami Bangladesh (HuJIB), the 
state government  has gone about identifying 
"Bangladeshi immigrants" as the  actual culprits.

Many Bangladeshi immigrants have since been 
rounded up for detention in Rajasthan. The state 
police has used strong arm   tactics in detaining 
Bengali Muslims by terming them as "illegal 
settlers" in the state. In the name of 
investigation, a large number of people mostly 
from extremely poor backgrounds have been 
subjected to traumatic interrogation  methods of 
the state police. They include migrants from West 
Bengal, Bihar and others (as a recent People's 
Union for Civil Liberties report points out). 
Even those with voter identity and ration cards 
and other identification papers have been rounded 
up and subjected to police harassment. There have 
even been newspaper reports about lawyers of the 
bar in Jaipur passing resolutions to not plead 
for those who have been detained in the blasts 
case.

Many of those who were rounded up for detention 
were brought in from ghettos, termed "transit 
camps" for such  migrants. People in these camps 
have been living in abysmal conditions with 
hardly any facility such as water supply or safe 
shelter. Many in these camps say they have 
migrated to India a long time ago or have moved 
from some other states.  The blasts case has been 
used as a ruse by the Bharatiya  Janata Party 
(BJP)?led government to raise the bogey of 
"swarming immigrants" from Bangladesh into the 
state. It is well understood that large numbers 
of Bangladeshis cross the Indian border to seek 
livelihood due to extreme poverty and because of 
the frequent occurrence of disasters such as 
floods at home. There have also been reports 
linking extremist  organisations such as the 
HuJIB with infiltration across  the border.

But the BJP has seen it necessary to carp on the 
immigration problem as a major issue everywhere. 
In the name of stopping "illegal migration" into 
the states where the party has been  in power, 
the BJP has been callous in its approach towards 
people belonging to the minority communities and 
those  speaking Bengali. The current actions by 
the BJP government in Rajasthan remind us of 
similar moves by the BJP-Shiv Sena government in 
Maharashtra against Muslim workers in  Mumbai 
city, branding many of them as illegal settlers 
and  forcing them to be deported, before a high 
court in Kolkata stayed deportations.

The complete disregard of human rights and the 
lack of a due judicial overview of the process of 
identifying immigrants is one part of the 
problem. The other issue pertains to the 
callousness involved in investigation of a crime 
of the nature of the Jaipur blasts. A large 
number of poor labourers and unorganised  workers 
have been targeted and subjected to harassment by 
linking them to the Jaipur blasts case. The 
statements made by the Rajasthan chief minister, 
Vasundhara Raje, have also hinted at enactment of 
new legislation, similar to the rescinded 
Prevention of Terrorism Act, which would further 
preclude any due process of law, and which has 
always been misused by  parties such as the BJP 
when in power. As it is, the BJP has  already 
tried to link the Jaipur blasts with the 
allegation that it has continually harped upon - 
that the central government has been lax on 
"national security", thus preparing the grounds 
for using this as a major issue for the 
forthcoming state assembly elections in Rajasthan.

A humanitarian way of handling the migration 
issue would involve the governments of both India 
and Bangladesh, with sufficient judicial 
safeguards to be provided to those whose 
residency is in question. The BJP's 
indiscriminate linking of  the issue of 
immigration with terrorist attacks and the sub? 
sequent harassment of various people on the 
suspicion that  they are "illegal immigrants" 
goes against the grain of such a humanitarian 
approach.


______


[4]

The Times of India
July 9, 2008

Myths About Muslims

by A G Noorani

There can be two opinions on the merits of the 
Indo-US accord on nuclear cooperation. But there 
can be no two opinions on the cynicism of those 
who have sought to play the Muslim card in the 
politics surrounding the deal. The timing betrays 
desperation. Hence, the recourse to cheap tactics.

Since Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and President 
George Bush agreed, three years ago, to work on 
civil nuclear energy cooperation between India 
and the US, there has been extensive debate on 
its implications. None of any significance 
mentioned any communal aspect, because it simply 
did not exist.

The credit for its discovery goes to a CPM MP, M 
K Pandhe, who confidently certified that "an 
overwhelming majority of the Muslim masses" 
opposed the deal. He urged the Samajwadi leader 
Mulayam Singh Yadav not to alienate them by 
supporting the deal. He was repudiated by CPM's 
leaders.

But Uttar Pradesh chief minister Mayawati saw an 
opening and jumped into the fray. She said the 
UPA government's decision to proceed with the 
nuclear deal had angered Muslims and accused the 
Congress as well as the Samajwadi Party of 
attacking her because they saw Muslims shifting 
to the BSP.

That was enough for a group of clerics to call on 
her in a delegation the very next day to 
congratulate her for her stand. An official press 
release claimed that the religious leaders urged 
her to use her influence to prevent the 
"anti-national" deal.

It is a pity that they had suppressed their views 
on the subject for so long. The country would 
have benefited hugely from their exposition of 
the flaws of the draft, and its "anti-national" 
character, given their considerable expertise in 
the field. If the objection is to any accord 
whatever with the Great Satan, one would like to 
know how they explain the deeply religious Saudi 
Arabia's close alliance with the US.

Iran, another country which is as devoutly 
Islamic, offered the US a "grand bargain" on May 
4, 2003 through the Swiss embassy in Tehran. It 
went beyond the nuclear issue and covered a host 
of topics including the peace process in 
Palestine and terrorism.

It is another matter that the offer was brusquely 
rejected by the US and the Swiss envoy was 
scolded for his pains.

Pakistan has been trying desperately but 
unsuccessfully for precisely such an accord with 
the US.

The only redeeming feature in this episode is the 
swift and sharp censure from Muslim organisations 
of standing which followed Pandhe's remarks. The 
Jamiat-ul-Ulema-i-Hind's spokesman, Maulana Abdul 
Hameed Noomani, protested on June 24 against 
Pandhe's attempt to "club the nuclear deal with 
the Muslim community".

He asked, "Why have they singled out the Muslim 
community on this issue?" The Jamat-e-Islami's 
spokesman, S Q R Ilyasi, spoke in the same vein 
saying "it only communalises the issue".

The episode merits discussion because it reveals 
the cynical manipulation of Muslims by some 
politicians, the readiness with which some 
Muslims lend themselves to such manipulation and, 
indeed, the pathetic state of Muslim politics in 
the country.

Evidently, it never occurred to those who waited 
on Mayawati on July 2 that neither she nor 
Mulayam Singh cared to issue a simple 
notification of the kind which Justice Jagdish 
Bhalla of the Allahabad high court on February 
12, 2001 asked the UP government to issue in 
order to speed up the criminal cases relating to 
the demolition of the Babri masjid. Neither the 
SP nor the BSP wanted to burn its bridges with 
the BJP.

Muslims earned no little odium for India's 
reluctance for long to establish diplomatic 
relations with Israel. In a speech at the Israeli 
Council of Foreign Relations in 2000, then 
foreign minister Jaswant Singh attributed it to a 
"very strong urge among politicians" to continue 
in office.

The Muslim vote could not be ignored, he said. 
This was unjust as archival material establish. 
In a letter to a close friend Frances Gunther on 
June 26, 1948, Jawaharlal Nehru acknowledged 
pro-Arab feelings in India.

"This was not confined to the Muslims but 
extended to others also," he wrote. However, he 
added, "This feeling has undergone a 
consi-derable change recently... in favour of the 
general Jewish attitude in Palestine". He had 
other reasons for stalling the exchange of envoys 
based on realpolitik. Nehru's policy paid 
handsome dividends. From 1948 till the 1965 war, 
Kashmir was a live issue internationally.

But Pakistan could not even contemplate moving it 
from the UN Security Council to the General 
Assembly in order to escape from the Soviet veto, 
because Gamal Abdel Nasser's Egypt and a few Arab 
states would have given cold comfort to Pakistan.

However, the myth of the Muslim veto and "vote 
bank" persisted. Fortunately, there are signs 
that the depressing pattern of old, with its 
manipulative politics, is being broken. Muslims 
are beginning to accept realistically that in a 
plural society no political party would do 
anything to promote any sectional interest - 
religious, linguistic, economic or other - at the 
risk of losing majority support.

But sectional interests are not helpless. They 
can articulate their demands within the national 
political process. Their effectiveness, however, 
will depend on their involvement in that process. 
In the final analysis there is no alternative to 
secular politics.

The writer is a Mumbai-based lawyer.

______


[5]

Daily Star
6 July 2008

Short Story

TWO-NATION THEORY*

by Saadat Hasan Manto
(translated by Khalid Hasan)

The first time Mukhtar saw Sharda was from his 
rooftop, where he had gone to grab a kite that 
had landed there. It was only a glimpse. She 
lived in the house across the street, which was 
lower than theirs, and he had seen her through 
the open window of the bathroom where she was 
washing herself, pouring water on her body from a 
pitcher. This was a surprise. Where had this girl 
materialized from, because no girl lived in that 
house. The ones who used to had all been married 
off. The only female now left was Roop Kaur, with 
her flabby husband and their three boys.

Mukhtar picked up his kite and stole another look 
at the girl. She was beautiful. A shudder ran 
through him. The water drops on the golden down 
of her body were shimmering. Her complexion was 
light brown, but it had the glow of copper. The 
tiny droplets of water that sparkled on her skin 
were making her body melt, drop by drop, or that 
was how it appeared to him. He was watching her 
through one of the eyeholes in the low brick wall 
built on all four sides of the open roof. His 
eyes were glued to the body of this girl bathing 
herself. She was no more than sixteen and there 
were water drops on her small, round breasts, 
lovely to look at. But he did not feel aroused. 
Her hair was not golden but light brown. Perhaps 
her hair had refused to go golden. Her body was 
full and supple but no lascivious thoughts came 
to him. When she poured water over herself, he 
felt as if she had removed her foamy covering 
with one calm, smooth move. When she was done, 
she dried herself with a towel, put on her 
clothes unhurriedly and, placing both hands on 
the window sill, stood up. She blushed. Her eyes, 
Mukhtar felt, had taken a dip into a lake of 
shyness. She closed the window shut and, 
involuntarily, Mukhtar laughed.

Then she threw open the window and looked towards 
him angrily. Mukhtar spoke, "Please don't blame 
me but why were you bathing with the window 
open?" She said nothing, cast another angry look 
at him and shut the window. Four days later, Roop 
Kaur came to their house, accompanied by that 
girl. Mukhtar's mother and sister were excellent 
knitters. Many girls from the neighbourhood would 
come to them to learn how to knit and do crochet 
work. This girl was fond of learning how to 
crochet and that was why she had come. Mukhtar 
stepped out of his room into the courtyard, 
smiled and left. She drew herself together when 
she saw him. Mukhtar learnt that her name was 
Sharda and she was Roop Kaur's cousin, daughter 
of her uncle. She lived in the small town of 
Chichoki Malyaan with her poor relatives, but 
Roop Kaur had asked her to come live with her 
family. She had finished high school and she was 
said to be very intelligent. It had taken her no 
time to learn how to crochet.

Several days passed. By now Mukhtar knew that he 
had fallen in love with her. It had happened 
gradually, from the moment he had first seen her 
through that eyehole to this point where her 
thought never left his heart for a moment. It 
occurred to Mukhtar several times that falling in 
love was wrong because Sharda was a Hindu. How 
could a Muslim dare fall in love with a Hindu? 
But the fact was that he just could not bear the 
thought of not being in love with her. Sharda 
would sometimes talk to him but somewhat 
diffidently. The first thing that would come to 
her mind on seeing him would be the memory of the 
day he had seen her through that eyehole taking a 
bath naked. One day, when Mukhtar's mother and 
sister had gone to offer condolences at a family 
friend's home, Sharda walked in, carrying the 
small bag she always did. It was about ten in the 
morning and Mukhtar was stretched on a cot in the 
courtyard reading a newspaper. "Where is 
Behanji?" she asked, referring to his sister. 
Mukhtar's hands began to tremble. "She has gone 
out." "And Mataji?" Sharda asked, which was what 
she called his mother. Mukhtar got down from the 
cot. "SheŠshe has gone with her." "All right 
then," she said, looking worried. Joining her 
hands in a namaste, she was about to leave when 
Mukhtar said, "Sharda!" "Yes?" She looked like 
someone who had just received an electric shock. 
Mukhtar said, "Sit down. They will be back very 
soon." "No, I am leaving," she replied but kept 
standing.

Picking up his courage, Mukhtar pulled her 
towards him by the wrist and kissed her on the 
lips. It all happened so quickly that Sharda was 
taken by surprise. By now both of them were 
trembling. "Please forgive me," was all that 
Mukhtar said. Sharda kept quiet but her copper 
complexion turned red and her lips began to 
quiver as if they were complaining about having 
been teased. Mukhtar made her sit on the cot and 
asked, "Why don't you speak, Sharda?" Under her 
dupatta, Sharda's heart was beating fast. She did 
not answer him. Mukhtar felt bothered by her 
silence. "Please say something, Sharda. If what I 
have done has offended you, as God is my witness, 
I'll apologize. I would never have had the 
courage but I don't know what came over me. The 
fact is that I am in love with you." Sharda's 
lips moved as if they were trying to form the 
word 'love'. Mukhtar began to talk animatedly, "I 
don't know if you understand the meaning of love. 
I don't know much about it myself. All I know is 
that I love you. If you want, I can place my life 
in your hands. Sharda, why don't you speak?"

Sharda's eyes became dreamy. Mukhtar began to 
talk again, "I saw you that day through that 
eyehole. I saw you and that is a sight I will not 
forget till Judgment Day. Why are you so shy? My 
eyes never stole your beauty. They just beheld a 
splendid scene. If you can bring it back, I will 
kiss your feet." And he kissed one of her feet.

She trembled. Then she rose from the cot and 
said, her voice quivering, "What are you doing? 
In our religionŠ" Mukhtar said excitedly, "Forget 
religion. All is right in the religion of love." 
He wanted to kiss her again but she leapt aside 
and, still smiling, she ran out. Mukhtar wanted 
to run up to the roof and jump from there into 
the courtyard and start dancing. Some time later, 
Mukhtar's mother and sister returned and so did 
Sharda. Mukhtar slipped away, his eyes to the 
ground. He did not want his secret to get out. 
The next day, he walked up to the rooftop. She 
was standing by the window, combing her hair. 
"Sharda," Mukhtar called out. She was startled. 
The comb fell from her hand, landing in the 
street. "You are so timid; look, your comb has 
fallen." "Why don't you buy me a new one then; 
this one has fallen into the gutter," Sharda 
said. "Now?" Mukhtar asked. "No, no, I was only 
joking." "I was also joking. Could I have left 
you to buy a comb? Never." Sharda smiled, "How am 
I going to do my hair?" Mukhtar slipped his 
finger through the eyehole from where he was 
watching her. "Use my fingers."

Sharda laughed. Mukhtar felt that he could 
happily spend his entire life under the shade of 
that laughter. "Sharda, by God, you laughed and I 
am in ecstasy. I want to smash these curtains of 
clay that stand between us." Sharda laughed 
again. Mukhtar said, "No one else should hear you 
laugh, nor even watch you when you do. Sharda, 
you must only laugh for me." "You know how to 
talk," Sharda said. "Then give me a reward, just 
a look of love from across there. I will save 
that look in my eyes and I'll keep it hidden." He 
noticed someone's shadow behind her and he moved 
away. When he returned, she was not at the window.

They came close in the days that followed and 
whenever they got a chance they would talk the 
sweet nothings that lovers do. One day, Roop Kaur 
and her husband, Lala Kalu Mal, were out of the 
house. Mukhtar happened to be walking past when a 
pebble hit him. He looked up and saw Sharda. She 
motioned him to come up. They were completely 
alone and they talked intimately for a long time. 
Mukhtar said, "I apologize for what I did that 
day. And I want to do the same thing today, but 
this time I won't apologize." Then he placed his 
lips on Sharda's quivering lips. "Say you are 
sorry," Sharda said naughtily. "No, those are not 
your lips, they are mine. Am I wrong?" Sharda 
lowered her eyes, "Not only those lips, all of me 
is yours too."

Mukhtar became grave. "Look, Sharda, we are 
standing on the top of a volcano. I assure you - 
and you should believe it - that no woman will 
ever come into my life except you. I swear that I 
will remain yours for the rest of my life. Do you 
also make the same promise?" Sharda raised her 
eyes. "My love is true." Mukhtar threw his arms 
around her and squeezed her to his chest. "Live, 
but only for me, for my love. By God, Sharda, if 
you had not returned my love, I would have killed 
myself. I am so fortunate."

Sharda rested her head on Mukhtar's shoulder. 
"You know how to talk; I cannot bring to my lips 
what is in my heart." They were together for a 
long time, absorbed in one another. When Mukhtar 
left, his spirits were imbued with a new and 
delicious pleasure. He kept thinking all night 
and the next day he left for Calcutta, where his 
father ran a business. He returned after eight 
days. Sharda came for her crochet hour. They did 
not speak but he felt her eyes asking him, "Where 
have you been all these days? Never said a word 
to me and left for Calcutta? What happened to 
those claims of love? I am not going to speak to 
you." There was much Muktar wanted to say to her 
but they could not find themselves alone. Two 
days passed. But their eyes talked whenever they 
ran into each other. On the third day, with Roop 
Kaur and her husband Lala Kalu Mal, again out of 
the house, Sharda called him.

She met him on the stairs and, when Mukhtar tried 
to embrace her, she wrested herself free and ran 
upstairs. She was annoyed. Mukhtar said to her, 
"Sweetheart, come sit with me. I have important 
things to talk to you, things which concern us 
both." She sat next to him on a bed. "Don't try 
to talk yourself out of it. Why did you go to 
Calcutta without telling me? Really, I wept so 
much." Mukhtar kissed her eyes. "That day when I 
went home, I kept thinking all night. After what 
took place that day, I had to think. In one leap, 
we covered such vast distances. You understand, 
Sharda."

She lowered her eyes. "Yes." "I went to Calcutta 
to talk to my father and you will be happy to 
know that I have his blessings." Mukhtar's eyes 
lit up with joy. He took Sharda's hands in his 
and said, "A weight has lifted from my heart; I 
can marry you now." "Marriage!" she said in a low 
voice. "Yes, marriage." Sharda asked, "How can we 
marry?" Mukhtar smiled, "Where is the difficulty? 
You become a Muslim." Sharda was startled, 
"Muslim!" Mukhtar replied calmly, "Yes, yes, what 
else can it be? I know your family will be up in 
arms, but I have made arrangements. We will go to 
Calcutta. My father will send for a cleric who 
will make you a Muslim and we will get married 
right away." Sharda clenched her lips, as if they 
were sewn up. Mukhtar looked at her. "Why have 
you become quiet?" She said nothing. "Sharda, 
tell me what is it?" Mukhtar asked in a worried 
voice.

With great difficulty, Sharda replied, "You 
become a Hindu." "I become a Hindu?" he asked in 
an astonished voice. Then he laughed. "How can I 
become a Hindu?" "And how can I become a Muslim?" 
she asked in a low voice. "Why can't you become a 
MuslimŠI mean you love me. And then Islam is the 
best of religions. The Hindu religion is no 
religion. Hindus drink cow urine; they worship 
idols. I meant it is all right in its place, but 
it cannot compare with Islam. If you become a 
Muslim, everything will fall in place." Sharda's 
copper face had gone white. "You won't become a 
Hindu?" Mukhtar laughed, "Are you mad!" Sharda's 
face had blanched. "You should leave. They will 
be coming about now." She rose from the bed. 
Mukhtar couldn't understand. "But ShardaŠ" "No, 
no, please leave, go quickly or they will be 
here," she said in a cold, uncaring voice. 
Mukhtar's throat had gone dry but with great 
difficulty he said, "We love each other, Sharda, 
why are you upset?" "Go, go away, our Hindu 
religion is very bad; you Muslims are the good 
ones." There was hatred in her voice. She went 
into the other room and shut the door.

Mukhtar, his Islam tucked inside his chest, left the house.

*From Saadat Hasan Manto's Selected Stories 
reviewed below. Slightly abridged for publication.


______


[6]

Communalism Watch - July 9, 2008

INDORE RAVAGED: THE AFTERMATH OF BJP SPONSORED BANDH
July 8th, 2008, Indore

by Vineet Tiwari

(Shafi Mohd. Sheikh, Jaya Mehta, Ashok Dubey, 
Pankhuri Mishra and Sourabh Das helped in 
collecting the data, meeting the victims and in 
writing this article).

In the wake of BJP and VHP's call for an all 
India Bandh, Indore town witnessed widespread 
violence on July 3rd & 4th 2008. Seven lives were 
lost. (Six of them were Muslims). Many people 
were injured and are admitted in the hospitals in 
serious conditions. It was merely a glimpse of 
the intention of the communalist forces active in 
town and in the state of Madhya Pradesh. They 
want to replicate the Gujarat experiment of 
massacre and bloodbath in MP too.

As the state government is of BJP, it was clear 
to everybody that state will rope in all its 
resources to make the Bandh a success. There has 
been a massive reshuffling of state bureaucratic 
cadre in the recent past. As a result, both the 
Collector and SP in the town have taken charge 
just about a month ago. One wonders if they 
bothered to get familiar with the history of 
recurrent communal strife in the town.

On the 3rd and 4th of July 2008, BJP and its 
allied cadre targeted the Muslim community in a 
planned manner and the administration offered 
them the opportunity to do so. Here is a brief 
chronology of the violent incidents which 
occurred.
1. On July 3rd, two outlets of Reliance Fresh 
opened their shutters to unload the vegetables 
which arrived in the morning. These outlets were 
attacked by the BJP, Bajrang Dal and VHP cadre.

2. At around 10.00 A.M., the Bandh supporters 
entered in the huge number in Badwali Chowki, a 
Muslim dominated area. They shouted provocative 
slogans and misbehaved with local residents. 
There was not enough police force to control the 
hooligans.

3. The same happened afterwards in other Muslim 
dominated areas -- Ranipura, Lodhipura, 
Mukeripura, Narsinghbazar, and Khajrana. In 
Khajrana area, people passing on the road were 
stopped. After ascertaining their religious 
identity, Muslim men and women were beaten up and 
left unattended. A mob of 10-15 people comprising 
of young teenager boys were beating Muslims with 
hockey sticks. Police was not helping the 
victims. Aroused people went to the police 
station but were not given any assurance. Angry 
and humiliated people poured their anger on 
Khajrana police station. It is also to be noted 
that the Bandh supporters were also there in 
large numbers. Filled with fury and fear, the 
Muslim community retaliated with stones and other 
weapons. Reportedly some ammunition arms were 
also there. Firing was opened from both the sides 
resulting in the loss of three lives. 
Incidentally all the three were Muslims.
Likewise, in Mukeripura area, when a mob of Bandh 
supporters reached near a Masjid, they shouted 
provocative slogans. There was stone pelting from 
the roof top of a building. Those who indulged in 
this violence covered their faces with 
handkerchiefs. The Bandh supporting mob also 
started throwing stones in retaliation. On the 
local television channels we observed that the 
police stood by helpless unable to stop the 
violence.

4. In all, four people died in the violence which 
erupted in the town on July 3rd, 2008. Police and 
district administration imposed curfew in four 
areas of the town. Both Collector and SP accepted 
in an interview with media, that they did not 
anticipate this level of violence. Three people 
died from the one area, Khajrana. They were all 
Muslims and the one Sindhi hindu youth died in 
another incident. Local residents reported that 
he was playing cricket outside his house, when 
BJP leaders took him to the riot affected 
vicinity.

5. It seems that even after the previous day's 
incidents, police and administration could not 
gauge the boiling temper of the town. Next day, 
i.e. on July 4th, 2008, fresh violence erupted in 
many other areas and took two more lives. 
Newspapers say that Muslims coming back from the 
nearby Masjid after Namaz started throwing the 
stones and petrol bombs. However, we were 
informed by some residents that first the 
Muslims, who were coming back peacefully after 
the Namaz were attacked. They retaliated. The 
police took action against Muslims only and 
supported the BJP and others taking active part 
in the riot. After this, curfew was imposed in 
the whole town.

6. The pressure of BJP on Police and 
administration can be well understood by one more 
incident. When curfew was imposed in the whole 
town, a religious procession of Venkatesh Mandir 
was not stopped in Chhatripura area. Police and 
administration found themselves helpless. Some 
3000 people participated in the procession. It is 
to be noted that the procession was taken out in 
an area which witnessed rioting and killing just 
a day before. Member of Parliament Sumitra 
Mahajan, MLA Mahendra Hardia and many other BJP 
leaders participated in this procession.

7. Kailash Vijayvargiya, a minister in the state 
government has been given the charge to restore 
peace and order. He has repeatedly alleged that 
SIMI is behind this eruption of violence. DG 
police reasserted this allegation. When asked to 
provide a satisfactory evidence for this 
allegation, press was informed that the police 
was looking for the evidence. Next day the police 
promptly put up the supporting evidence. It 
should be noted here that in the recent past 
police has been found guilty of planting false 
evidence and harassing innocent people in 
connection with SIMI activities.

As elsewhere in the country, Indore also has a 
glorious past of communal harmony. However, for 
last two decades the engineered communal tensions 
and clashes are increasing. The reason is no 
different than that in other parts of the country.
The Holkar state is known for its secular and 
progressive rule in the region. It is common to 
find temples and mosques or churches built 
adjacent to each other. Now, with the advent of 
communal strife, these symbols of peaceful 
coexistence are being used to poison people's 
mind and to fill the two communities with hatred. 
Not a single month goes without a major or minor 
communal skirmish in the town.

Communal politics has made deep inroads in the 
administrative setup as well as in the audio 
visual and print media. Temples in Police 
Stations are a common feature in entire country, 
including the states ruled by the left front. Now 
a days, the press clubs are also not spared. In 
Indore Press Club, one can see a newly built big 
enough temple inside the premise.

Muslim community in Khajrana reports that on 3rd 
of July the RSS and Bajrang Dal systematically 
bashed up the Muslims walking on the street. When 
the muslims went to lodge a complaint at the 
local police station the police refused to do so 
. This infuriated the Muslims and they started 
throwing stones. This was promptly photographed 
and reported by the media 'Muslim mob in communal 
frenzy'. Innumerable instances of such biased and 
inflammatory reporting can be cited. Channels 
were showing continuously the scenes of violence 
for next 2-3 days after the incident with the 
label 'LIVE'.

Media was reporting in great detail how people 
(middle class) are passing their time in 
curfew---playing cricket in the streets or inside 
the compounds of their multi storied buildings, 
or men cooking some good dishes celebrating it as 
a holiday, or watching TV with family or playing 
cards, etc. Little space was left for reporting 
plight of those whose near ones died or those who 
are lying in hospitals. There was no effort from 
media to mobilise public opinion to take action 
against the culprits of this crime. There were 
several shows of peace seeking people appealing 
public to calm down. There was a general 
philosophical message inherent in these all that 
"Past is past; now forget about it and restore 
peace", as though; it was a natural calamity or 
merely an accident.

Reportedly, the police force on the pretext of 
guarding the streets under curfew entered the 
Muslim resident area and indiscriminately 
attacked their vehicles and threw stones at their 
houses. Reportedly, there was firing from the 
rooftops of police quarters.

Furthermore, Sewa Bharati, an RSS outfit, 
declared help for curfew affected people by 
providing them the food. Some mobile numbers were 
also shown on the television to contact. This 
reminded me of the US attack on Afghanistan when 
they threw food packets along with the bombs. On 
July 7th, 2008, BJP leaders took out a peace 
march in a riot affected area. This was clearly 
giving a silent message to minority that- Look, 
nothing happened to us and nothing will happen to 
us. You minorities, be aware of our strength. 
Quiet and calm Collector and SP were also 
silently reaffirming the message. There are 
hoardings in the town asking the union government 
to take back the Haj facilities from Muslims, if 
Amarnath Shrine Board is not given the land title 
in Jammu. These hoardings display the names of 
the very same people who took the lead in the 
Peace March.

On July 7th, 2008, we interviewed and took the 
statements of the injured people and talked to 
their relatives. Three were critical. They got 
injured in firing. They were kept on ventilators. 
I saw them. The same night, one of them died who 
was hit by a bullet in the neck.

Congress leaders came and took the BJP, RSS and 
district administration to task, but they are no 
real hope. With the nearing elections in the 
state, as well as in the nation, the focus will 
soon shift from providing real justice to the 
victims to collecting votes.

In such circumstances, we know that there is no 
readymade solution. It is also not that that we 
have suddenly got up from any sleep after this 
shock. We, in limited numbers and in more limited 
resources, have been fighting with these communal 
fascist forces, forces of globalisation and 
forces of darkness for years. But, and this has 
been a big but for all of us, these forces are 
gaining fresh strength day by day.
We appeal to all anti communal, anti fascist 
forces to keep a close watch on Madhya Pradesh, 
and try to spare more time for the activities in 
Madhya Pradesh, and make strong links with the 
likeminded people and organisations.

*****

CONTACTS: Sandarbh Kendra, 26, Mahavir Nagar, Off Kanadia Road, INDORE-452018.
Vineet Tiwari -09893192740, Jaya 
Mehta-0731-2561663, Ashok Dubey-9424577474, Shafi 
Mohd. Sheikh-9425032121

______


[7]


United States Commission on International Religious Freedom
800 N. Capitol Street, N.W., Suite 790
Washington, D.C. 20002
Phone: (202) 523-3240
Fax: (202) 523-5020

USCIRF Urges Denial of U.S. Visa to Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
July 8, 2008

Contact: Judith Ingram
Communications Director
(202) 523-3240, ext. 127


WASHINGTON - The United States Commission on 
International Religious Freedom urges the U.S. 
State Department to reaffirm its past decision to 
deny a tourist visa to Gujarat Chief Minister 
Narendra Modi, who has been invited to attend a 
conference in New Jersey this August celebrating 
Gujarati culture. Modi was previously denied 
entrance to the United States due to his role in 
riots that overtook the Indian state of Gujarat 
from February to May 2002 in which reportedly as 
many as 2,000 Muslims were killed, thousands 
raped, and over 200,000 displaced. Numerous 
reports, including reports of official bodies of 
the Government of India, have documented the role 
of Modi's state government in the planning and 
execution of the violence, and the failure to 
hold perpetrators accountable.

Following Modi's invitation to attend conferences 
in the U.S. in 2005, the Commission successfully 
urged the State Department to revoke Modi's U.S. 
tourist visa. Despite pressure from the Indian 
government, the State Department revoked his visa 
under the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), 
which prohibits foreign government officials who 
are "responsible for or directly carried out, at 
any time, particularly severe violations of 
religious freedom" from obtaining U.S. visas. 
This section was added to the INA by the 
International Religious Freedom Act of 1998. The 
Commission once again urges the State Department 
to announce Modi's ineligibility for a visa under 
the terms of the INA.

"We have not seen changes that would warrant a 
policy reversal," said Commission Chair Felice D. 
Gaer. "As official bodies of the government of 
India have found, Narendra Modi is culpable for 
the egregious and systematic human rights abuses 
wrought against thousands of India's Muslims. Mr. 
Modi must demonstrate to the State Department and 
to the American people why he-as a person found 
to have aided and abetted gross violations of 
human rights, including religious freedom-should 
now be eligible for a tourist visa.

Following the riots in 2002, India's National 
Human Rights Commission issued a report that 
pointed to the role of Modi's government in the 
systematic murder of Muslims and the calculated 
destruction of Muslim homes and businesses. In 
2003, the Indian central government found 
corruption and anti-Muslim bias to be so 
pervasive in the Gujarat judiciary that riot 
cases were shifted for trial to the neighboring 
state of Maharashtra. Despite this action, the 
lack of justice for victims remains a serious 
concern, as there have been very few court 
convictions in the six years since the 
religion-based riots. In 2007, a series of 
articles in the Indian publication Tehelka 
documented police officers and government 
officials on audio and videotape confessing that 
they facilitated the violence, at times at the 
direct behest of Modi.

"The inaction of Gujarat's government and police 
force in the face of severe violence against 
religious minorities is an inexcusable abuse of 
international human rights obligations," Gaer 
said.

URL: 
http://www.uscirf.gov/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2219&Itemid=1

______


[9] Announcements:

(i)

Dear Friend

I am happy to inform you that the Nehru Memorial 
Museum and Library is organizing a preview and 
release of INQILAB, a documentary film on Shaheed 
Bhagat Singh on Sunday, 13 July 2008 at 5 pm

This documentary forms part of a year long 
celebration of the Bhagat Singh Birth Centenary, 
150 years of the Revolt of 1857 and 60 years of 
India's independence.

The details of the programme is attached.
Looking forward to seeing you in Teen Murti.

With warm regards

(Mridula Mukherjee)

--
Professor Mridula Mukherjee
Director
Nehru Memorial Museum and LIbrary
Teen Murti House, New Delhi-110011
Ph: 91-11-23015333, 23017089
Fax: 91-11-23793296
directornehrumemorial at gmail.com

[See attachment at: http://www.sacw.net/free/Bhatgatsinghinvite.gif ]

- - -

(ii)


FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Sunday, July 6th, 2008

Indian Muslim Council-USA (IMC-USA - 
http://www.imc-usa.org), an advocacy group 
dedicated to safeguarding India's pluralist and 
tolerant ethos is organizing an US lecture tour 
of noted civil rights activist Teesta Setalvad 
and retired police official R. B. Sreekumar, 
starting today in Philadelphia.

Teesta Setalvad is a Mumbai based civil rights 
activist, journalist and educationist. She 
reported for the Mumbai editions of The Daily 
(India) and The Indian Express newspapers. 
Appalled by the communal violence during the 
Bombay Riots, she, along with activist husband 
Javed Anand, quit full-time journalism in 1993 to 
start the monthly magazine Communalism Combat. 
Teesta Setalvad won the Nuremberg International 
Human Rights Award 2003 and in 2007 she was 
awarded the Padma Shri by the Government of India 
for her role in "Public Affairs in Maharashatra". 
Teesta Setalvad, has been at the forefront of 
fighting for the Gujarat pogrom cases and getting 
the Supreme Court to move the cases out of 
Gujarat. Her tireless efforts finally brought 
justice to the victims in the famous "Best Bakery 
Case" despite intimidations and hostile witnesses.

R.B.Sreekumar is a Retired Senior Police Officer 
of the Indian Police Service (IPS). Sreekumar was 
the Additional Director General of Police and 
Chief Intelligence Officer in Gujarat during the 
brutal state sponsored massacres of Muslims and 
the rape of Muslim women by Hindu mobs, 
orchestrated by Chief Minister Narendra Modi. He 
courageously thwarted attempts by his political 
bosses in Gujarat to cover-up and subvert justice 
in the aftermath of Gujarat carnage in 2002. He 
served the Gujarat State for 35 years in various 
positions before retiring in 2007 as Additional 
Director General of Police. He was awarded the 
Medal for Meritorious Service in 1990 and a Medal 
for Distinguished Service in 1998 by the 
Government of India. He was awarded The 
Gangadharan Memorial Award for Best Police Man, 
in April 2008, for his "courageous and competent 
performance of duties" during 2002 Gujarat 
pogroms.

Indian Muslim Council-USA is the largest advocacy 
organization of Indian Muslims in the United 
States with 10 chapters across the nation.

EVENT SCHEDULE:
Sunday, July 6th, 2008         - Philadelphia, PA     - 610-453-3751
Tuesday, July 8th, 2008        - Amnesty 
International Office, Washington D.C. - 
202-544-0200 ext. 224
Thursday, July 10th, 2008     - Baltimore, MD        - 410-903-1157
Friday, July 11th, 2008          - Miami, FL               - 954-801-3912
Saturday, July 12th, 2008     - Minneapolis, MN     - 952-994-7885
Sunday, July 13th, 2008        - Chicago, IL            - 630-248-1678

CONTACT:
Syed Ali Rahman
phone/fax: 1-800-839-7270
email: info at imc-usa.org


_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/

Buzz for secularism, on the dangers of fundamentalism(s), on
matters of peace and democratisation in South
Asia. SACW is an independent & non-profit
citizens wire service run since 1998 by South
Asia Citizens Web: www.sacw.net/
SACW archive is available at: http://sacw.net/pipermail/sacw_insaf.net/

DISCLAIMER: Opinions expressed in materials carried in the posts do not
necessarily reflect the views of SACW compilers.